Just a few musings on possible house rules. Any feed back would be appreciated.
Rules
Dual Roles
Dependant upon the campaign some leadership roles may overlap this is especially true of the Ruler a Theocracy will have the ruler fulfilling the role of both Ruler and High Priest. Similar crossovers occur with various government types a Ruling General or Magister would not be uncommon or even a high priest Grand Diplomat. Unfortunately no character could hope to thoroughly fulfil both roles adequately at all times. A solution is to have the character in the dual role be able to fill both roles but take a penalty dependant upon the kingdom size (-1 ability modifier for kingdom 1-20 hexes, -2 ability modifier for a kingdom 21-80 hexes and -3 ability modifier for a kingdom 81+ hexes.) This penalty is due to the necessity to have underlings carry out necessary duties which increase with kingdom size.
Build it up.
Creating a city that expands vertically instead of horizontally
It is assumed that the height of most kingdom buildings would not exceed two stories. To create a city with taller structures a cost of 1 ½ x the regular BP for each structure (whether entire structure or only partial) is needed for each level built above the ground level this represents the additional cost of construction and creating secure foundations.
Each level can be counted as a separate district for the purposes of consumption but all district wide bonuses apply to all of the levels. Similarly buildings that can only be built once per district can still only be built once irrespective of the level that they are built on. Each level up is counted as a city block.
Buildings that span multiple city blocks can expand vertically but must be directly above eg a 4 storey (2 level) academy. Buildings that have prerequisite buildings may still need to be adjacent in some manner but may also be vertically adjacent.
Lastly a district can only expand up levels once the kingdom becomes large enough. (1-10 single level, 11-20 maximum 2 levels etc)
Going down.
Similarly to going up a city may also expand down using the same mechanics as expanding up but the cost is 2x normal BP for buildings due to the cost of excavation of buildings and connecting tunnels. For each level the city goes down a bonus of +2 stability is gained.
There cost of the vertical expansion is covered by the increased building costs and does not require the district to be prepared again.
Improvements.
Magical sanitation (20 BP ; one leader must be able to case purify food and drink and have access to the create wondrous item feat.)
Through the use of placement of purifying zones in the cities sewers and dumps pollution and disease are lessened Loyalty +2, Stability +2
Continual illumination (10BP; halved if leader has access to continual flame)
Casting of continual flame through out the district lowers crime and accidents. Loyalty +1, Stability +1, Unrest -1
Feats
Sovereign Might (Kingdom)
Your might is inspiring,
Prerequisite: Str 13, Must occupy a leadership role in a kingdom.
Benefit: You may use your strength modifier -1 in place of the nominated ability score for a leadership role.
Noble Grace (Kingdom)
You adapt quickly to events around you,
Prerequisite: Dex 13, Must occupy a leadership role in a kingdom.
Benefit: You may use your dexterity modifier -1 in place of the nominated ability score for a leadership role.
Regal Perseverance (Kingdom)
You are relentless in your efforts,
Prerequisite: Con 13, Must occupy a leadership role in a kingdom.
Benefit: You may use your constitution modifier -1 in place of the nominated ability score for a leadership role.
Royal Intellect (Kingdom)
Your knowledge and intellect serve you well,
Prerequisite: Int 13, Must occupy a leadership role in a kingdom.
Benefit: You may use your intelligence modifier -1 in place of the nominated ability score for a leadership role.
Wisdom of the Monarch (Kingdom)
Your are wise in the machinations of rulership,
Prerequisite: Wis13, Must occupy a leadership role in a kingdom.
Benefit: You may use your wisdom modifier -1 in place of the nominated ability score for a leadership role.
Inspiring Magesty (Kingdom)
Your strength of character inspires your subjects,
Prerequisite: Cha 13, Must occupy a leadership role in a kingdom.
Benefit: You may use your charisma modifier -1 in place of the nominated ability score for a leadership role.
Some solid work here I need to let it marinate before I give more feedback, but I like where your head is at...
Dual Roles = making lots of sense.
Building up and down also makes sense but I also throw out district limits because they are dumb.
Feats: Ok here's where I'm like no thanks as a player/GM. Not going to take a feat to take a position and get a -1 penalty to boot!
Honestly the -1 penalty is enough just houserule/handwaive it its your game and more importantly the PCs can craft their state as they wish including the requirements. The brevic system is represented but positions varry.
I don't like dual-roles. The roles were designed to be single-character positions from the beginning, and every role shaved off of those 11 or 12 is one less point of contact the GM has with the Kingdom itself. Without NPC roles, the GM has a much diminished ability to affect the narrative of the kingdom without constantly besieging it with external forces -- you no longer have that possibility of infighting or maneuvering because your four-to-six PCs have nailed down most or all of the 11~ leadership roles.
I had a Galtan revolutionary that loved the people and worked well as a Councilor, but he argued with the king and eventually quietly published a pamphlet calling for the people to take a more direct part in their own governance. I'm not going to say I couldn't have found another way to make that happen, but it's much more interesting to have it happen from one of the leaders -- not just some migrant off the street, but one of the players' allies, who they'd been working alongside for some time. The NPC meant well but the players felt very attacked (he was calling for their power to be diminished!) and it was more emotionally-charged than the alternative, which would probably have been a stern talking-to and imprisonment for somebody they hadn't met before.
I love the idea of building up and digging down. Towering spires of black spikes or fragile crystal, often interconnected with bridges or guarded by aeries of trained beasties are icons of fantasy that I think a lot of people would like to see represented in their city. I would wonder what special events might happen in towering cities that might not happen elsewhere, and I can already think of events that could plague subterranean fortress-cities.
My players were making slow progress on annexing the kobolds, but the kobolds were pent up in a several-hex radius of their lair -- very inconvenient for their desired growth. Since they were protected (trapped) on all sides by the players' territory, they decided to focus inward and begin excavating further in and expanding their effective hex-space. It probably would have come to a pleasant surprise when the players completed the annexing, but then, it probably would also be preceded by them breaking into the Darklands.
The 'excavating levels' bonus seems like it should have a limit or diminishing factor to me. Digging one block of buildings straight down is mechanically far superior to actually making subterranean levels, so it just incentivizes cities making a single 'spike' that goes straight down for huge bonuses, which seems unrealistic to me.
Not a fan of the feats. On the one hand, sinking a feat into running the kingdom and getting no outside benefit seems really underwhelming to me (although hey, maybe that bonus you're getting is one that you'll pull back out by working the magic item economy and awarding a lot of extra gear?).
I feel like it trivializes the ability score associations of the roles. Everybody is almost as good as everybody at everything and you can expect stable +3s, 4s and 5s in every position. It would be perfectly fine for an illiterate brute to be the kingdom's treasurer because he punches debts until they get smaller, and the royal assassin can chase down enemies of the state and pose koans so cryptic that they (presumably) die and the Unrest of the kingdom drops.
The roles are already rather flexible with usually two and even sometimes three different ability scores affecting a Role. Even if characters can't use their best stat, they can usually use one of their secondaries; and if their secondaries aren't good, they can usually boost their other stats to adequate levels.
What can I say? I'm really wary of anything that promotes single-attribute dependency. It feels like it removes hard choices.
I forget if Leadership granting +4 to your bonuses is official, or not -- but if it is, I'll grant you that your rules are alternatives to characters who would otherwise want Leadership, but whose GMs have banned the feat.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
Dual Roles isn't necessary if you are good at introducing NPCs, and there are many, many NPCs in Kingmaker. The clarity of the rule needs to be worked on. I say this because it took about three or four times to understand a couple of the sentences. Lastly, there really isn't benefit from having one PC fulfill two roles in the government unless there is such a lack of loyal NPCs that they can't fill those roles. If there is such a lack, they have bigger problems.
Building Up and Building Down seem okay, but I think the rules need to be worked on a bit more. I also don't think that they are needed in Kingmaker. I think you may have done a bit too much here, and I see a few limitations that are a bit much. Trim the rules up and make them simpler. I would just do something like the following: You can add a new district above or below a current district. Multiply the cost of preparing a new district by the number of district layers, including the one being bought. Therefore, if I was adding a third district on top, I would be multiplying the normal cost by 3.
I wouldn't do much more than that, and I would keep the buildings at their current costs.
I will return to critique the other stuff later.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the feedback, the original idea behind dual roles was for specific government roles such as a church state etc but i can see the issue with limiting npcs in the government. Again originally i was going to have a new position Chamberlain which would substitute in for one of the dual roles maybe i should work this in.
The feats were mainly again for the ruler . A smart or wise king should be a pretty good ruler and Troubleshooter a get your point but i can imagine a strong treasurer would effectively collect taxes like a brute squad and "assasinations" need not be physical an attack at reputation could be more effective. The burning of a feat would be a limiting feature to stop misuse. There is of course a simple headband that gives +3 to all charisma checks which would bring most characters to good ruler level but i was after a bit less mechanical a solution.
The building up and down i agree the cost should stack a simple +1 multiplyer per extra level would be easy athough maybe a +3 bp x extra level of building would stop costs spiralling. I think getting rid of the district limits is a good idea although common sense would dictate building an entire 36 block on level 2 and only having one house on level 1 may not work. Going down would not have this problem. Troubleshooter thanks for pointing out the single block issue. Perhaps a bonus only applies for having 50% of the district and 50 % of all districts above complete.
Again thanks for the critiques i shall ponder ....
While there are plenty of NPCs available throughout the AP, there aren't enough when the kingdom is founded, and some of those are not ready to be persuaded immediately. Jhod, for example, is probably not going to accept the role of High Priest until there's either a settlement around the temple he's spent so much time restoring, or a new temple in the capital.
But the penalties for empty slots can be crippling to a new kingdom, so I'm either going to allow dual roles, or rule that some slots can be left empty without penalty until the kingdom reaches a certain size - it makes sense for example that while it's still one town and a couple of farms, there's only a need for one of the military roles, and some of the others such as Magister are a luxury for a small settlement.
If I go with dual roles, the rule will be that PCs can occupy two roles, but can't apply the same stat to both of them. This means that they will be filling one role to the best of their ability but just keeping the seat warm in the other one.
|
While there are plenty of NPCs available throughout the AP, there aren't enough when the kingdom is founded, and some of those are not ready to be persuaded immediately. Jhod, for example, is probably not going to accept the role of High Priest until there's either a settlement around the temple he's spent so much time restoring, or a new temple in the capital.
But the penalties for empty slots can be crippling to a new kingdom, so I'm either going to allow dual roles, or rule that some slots can be left empty without penalty until the kingdom reaches a certain size - it makes sense for example that while it's still one town and a couple of farms, there's only a need for one of the military roles, and some of the others such as Magister are a luxury for a small settlement.
If I go with dual roles, the rule will be that PCs can occupy two roles, but can't apply the same stat to both of them. This means that they will be filling one role to the best of their ability but just keeping the seat warm in the other one.
I saw this as part of what the GM has to do to flesh out this AP- create lots and lots of NPCs. You will need even more as the game advances. The AP is on a more massive scale than GMs/players are used to normally, and making NPCs and introducing them to the party is a big part of this particular story. To me, it is a big part of what makes it feel like a kingdom spanning game.
The number one reason to use lots of NPCs is because a smart player will know that if an NPC suddenly shows up one day, they are either an ally or an enemy. A short period of intense scrutiny (which is possible because there is only one NPC) renders the correct judgment fairly quickly. However, if you throw 50 NPCs at the party, they have no way to tell which ones are important, which ones are colorful scenery, and which ones are bad guys.
More importantly, as a GM, an easy way to develop your storylines is to see which NPCs the party latches on to, and run with those. Let the rest fall to the background and carry on. If you really like some of the ones missed, have them recurr. This usually causes the PCs to take interest, and once more you have a bunch of new storylines. If you don't have the time or desire to create a bunch of NPCs, you might check out the NPC codex, Rivals guide, mine other APs for NPCs and just change their names, etc.
For instance, give the players at least three choices for every council position that requires an NPC, plus throw in some extra strange characters. You may be surprised at who your PCS select!
I can see the merit in having dual roles. But it should be beneficial to have all roles filled by a guy who doesn't have to care about another role.
My idea to solve this is: Allow choosing a second role, but doing this reduces your bonus on the second role by -1 and doesn't get the bonus for the second role at all. All it does for the second role is negate the penalty for not having it filled.
I can see the merit in having dual roles. But it should be beneficial to have all roles filled by a guy who doesn't have to care about another role.
My idea to solve this is: Allow choosing a second role, but doing this reduces your bonus on the second role by -1 and doesn't get the bonus for the second role at all. All it does for the second role is negate the penalty for not having it filled.
I like it!
I can see the merit in having dual roles. But it should be beneficial to have all roles filled by a guy who doesn't have to care about another role.
My idea to solve this is: Allow choosing a second role, but doing this reduces your bonus on the first role by -1 and doesn't get the bonus for the second role at all. All it does for the second role is negate the penalty for not having it filled.
fixed an error and bolded it.